UC Berkeley has confirmed that it turned over the names of 160 students, faculty, and staff members to the Trump administration as part of a federal investigation into alleged antisemitism on campus. The move, revealed Thursday, was carried out under the direction of the University of California Office of the President.
The request came from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), which is investigating dozens of colleges, universities, and even K-12 school districts across the country. Federal officials demanded comprehensive documentation, including names tied to reports of antisemitism.
A Climate of Fear and McCarthyism Comparisons
The disclosure has sparked strong backlash. Among those identified is Judith Butler, a prominent Berkeley professor of feminist philosophy. Butler confirmed their name was included and criticized the university’s decision, comparing it to McCarthy-era blacklists of the 1950s.
In a letter shared with the San Francisco Chronicle, Butler expressed concern that compliance could expose individuals to surveillance or restrictions. “If my name, or the names of my colleagues, are on a list, they can be used in whatever way that office and that government deems appropriate,” Butler wrote.
Butler further noted that no formal charges were presented, nor was there any process to dispute the accusations. They warned that such actions undermine trust and fairness within the academic community.
Heightened Federal Scrutiny on Campuses
The Trump administration has placed antisemitism in education at the center of its agenda, portraying it as an unchecked crisis. At a congressional hearing in July, Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) declared that antisemitic violence was “spiraling out of control at universities all over the country.”
During that hearing, UC Berkeley Chancellor Rich Lyons, along with leaders from Georgetown University and the City University of New York, faced tough questioning from Republican lawmakers over how their institutions handle antisemitism complaints.
How and Why the Names Were Released
A Sept. 4 letter from Berkeley’s chief campus attorney, David Robinson, confirmed that the names were submitted on Aug. 18 under legal instructions from UC’s systemwide counsel. The letter, addressed to those affected, explained that OCR had demanded “comprehensive documents, including files and reports related to alleged antisemitic incidents.”
The UC Office of the President declined to comment when asked about the disclosure.
UC’s Funding Pressures
The controversy comes amid tense negotiations between UC President James Milliken and the Trump administration. Federal officials have frozen more than $500 million in research grants to UCLA and are demanding that the UC system pay back over twice that amount before restoring access.
Observers suggest this financial standoff may have contributed to Berkeley’s willingness to comply fully with the federal requests.
Students and Faculty Raise Due Process Concerns
Many who received Robinson’s letter said they were frustrated not only by being included but also by the absence of transparency. Butler pointed out that those listed were never told the substance of the allegations and had no opportunity to respond.
“None of us were given the chance to know or rebut the allegation,” Butler wrote, arguing that protections similar to those in the Sixth Amendment—such as the right to counsel, to know one’s accuser, and to understand the evidence—were being denied.
Pro-Palestinian Speech Under the Spotlight
The disclosure comes at a time of escalating campus activism following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza. Protests have erupted nationwide, with many students voicing solidarity with Palestinians and criticizing Israel’s actions.
According to the Daily Californian, a graduate student who also received the Robinson letter said the common link among those named was their support for Palestinians. Speaking anonymously out of fear of retaliation, the student said the list could be used to suppress dissent. “Now I have to consult lawyers about whether it’s safe to even continue my research,” the student told the paper.
Growing Anxiety About Retaliation
For many, the central fear is not just academic consequences but the possibility of government surveillance or restrictions on travel and communication. Because the investigation provides no details about the basis for inclusion, uncertainty looms over how federal authorities may use the information.
Robinson’s letter noted that the federal investigation is ongoing and cautioned that the university may face further requests for records. This means additional names or documents could still be turned over.
In the meantime, those identified are left grappling with uncertainty. The lack of charges or transparency has raised broader concerns about whether universities should comply so readily with politically charged federal demands.
